On the road today. First, Powshiek County, Montezuma. ORed the client so she could be transferred out of county. Mike Mahaffey made me an offer we will probably take, but not at the moment. After Powshiek, drove to Newton for a Jasper County probation revocation. Not much to argue about. The fellow was placed on probation in November 2007 and promptly disappeared until recaptured in eastern Iowa on new charges. We stipulated to the violation and to revocation. Judge Gamble happened to be in Jasper County. Hadn't seen him in some time. He always seemed to like getting on the road once in a while.
From Jasper County drove to Marion County, Knoxville where I had two cases scheduled for pretrial. The prosecutors offered my clients quite good deals both of which were rejected and trials set. I'm always a little amused and how pissy prosecutors become when you say no deal, let's try it. If defense attorneys would begin trying cases, the system would break down. Maybe the prosecutors would show some balls when dealing with their officers. The two cases are set out to September and the clients have a decent chance of folding before trial.
At the moment I have trials scheduled, that may actually go, in Jasper, Marion, and Guthrie. Not quite sure how to deal with the case in Powshiek that is set for trial. My guy wants to plead, but he Court won't take the plea because he says he doesn't remember anything until waking up in the jail. I do have two more public intoxications set in Jasper County. It's time the local police who file these things should begin spending their days waiting in the halls of the courthouse.
06 July 2010
16 April 2010
Guthrie County
Depositions in Guthrie County this morning. The Clerk's office in Guthrie will now be closed every Friday. Apparently another cost saving measure directive from the Chief Justice although I may be assigning blame where no blame belongs. It was an interesting hour and a half. I find that County Attorneys differ only in their level frustration and the methods by which they show it when during depositions their case goes out the nearest window. I am not giving credit where credit is due however, for there are a few that will realistically observe that they don't have a case and dump it. Not the situation here in Guthrie apparently.
Depositions can be very worthwhile. Some attorneys do not use them, but in many cases depositions can clearly show who should be folding their tent. On occasions it is the defendant who needs convincing he should take a deal. On other occasions, it is the county attorney who should be making a reasonable offer or dumping the case. Too many cases resolve themselves at deposition not to take them when a considerable difference exists in versions of the events between the defendant, the alleged victim, and witnesses.
Depositions can be very worthwhile. Some attorneys do not use them, but in many cases depositions can clearly show who should be folding their tent. On occasions it is the defendant who needs convincing he should take a deal. On other occasions, it is the county attorney who should be making a reasonable offer or dumping the case. Too many cases resolve themselves at deposition not to take them when a considerable difference exists in versions of the events between the defendant, the alleged victim, and witnesses.
06 April 2010
Jail
Have a trial scheduled for Monday in Newton. My client is in jail and I was looking forward to trying it. The charges are assault on a police officer and interference with a police officer causing injury. Two of the arresting officers had a scratch. Our Newton police will file whatever they can. This is a long way from the police officers who were working in Newton when I first came to town. I actually think they thought an occasional scratch was part of the job. They certainly were capable of taking care of themselves. At any rate, my client engaged in fisticuffs at the jail with another inmate and received the worst of it. He apparently suffered injuries other than the black eye that was obvious. He felt, as I did, that going into a trial such as we had scheduled all banged up from a fight was not the best idea. After consultation, he decided he would take the deal offered by the county attorney and plead to reduced charges.
I then left the jail and informed the clerk of court they would not have to call a jury and stopped by the county attorney's office and informed the assistant county attorney that the defendant would take the plea offer which the assistant county attorney thought was an acceptable resolution to the case. I would have liked to try the case. I am not sure that a jury would have thought the defendant intentionally assaulting a police officer by kicking him while his head is being "directed" as the officers put, to the hood of the police car. There are times when, as a defense attorney, it seems appropriate to show the citizens of a community just how their finest act.
I then left the jail and informed the clerk of court they would not have to call a jury and stopped by the county attorney's office and informed the assistant county attorney that the defendant would take the plea offer which the assistant county attorney thought was an acceptable resolution to the case. I would have liked to try the case. I am not sure that a jury would have thought the defendant intentionally assaulting a police officer by kicking him while his head is being "directed" as the officers put, to the hood of the police car. There are times when, as a defense attorney, it seems appropriate to show the citizens of a community just how their finest act.
03 April 2010
Did a little trial prep this morning for my trial scheduled Thursday in Marshalltown. The pretrial order states that we are fourth up. I have been told I need to call the county attorney's office Monday and possible later in the week also to determine if any of the three ahead of us will go to trial or they have settled. This does not seem to be a very efficient manner of running a trial docket. Of course, the judge is not inconvenienced, but if you have witnesses, it can be quite costly and very annoying to witnesses who plan on attending then are told it will be some other date. It is the maxim of minimizing the inconvenience to the court while maximizing the inconvenience of the litigants.
02 April 2010
Marshall County
I have a case in Marshall County which is scheduled for trial next week. Every county handles their case load differently. I was told at the pretrial conference yesterday that they might have 10 cases on the docket for Thursday, including mine. The first case on the list that doesn't settle will go to trial that day. The others will need to be rescheduled. I must call the county attorney on Monday to see where we are on the list and apparently continue to call to see what has fallen out ahead of us. This is inconvenient. If we have a case where several witnesses need to be subpoenaed, you might have to subpoena them several different times and, in addition, keep them posted on developments. This is especially annoying if they are hostile witnesses and you really don't want to talk to them. And yes, occasionally you do call a hostile witness. This is done when you know that what they are to say contradicts other hostile witnesses or in some other fashion helps your case.
On the fourth floor of the Marshall County Courthouse there is a room where the attorneys congregate to cut their deals, determine which cases will go to trial. I did notice that the public defender had a stack of files about a foot and a half high which indicates to me that numerous defendants don't see much of their attorney. And, of course, the representative from the public defender's office was the attorney in the room with the least sense of humor, the least talkative, and generally unfriendly. This reinforces my opinion that the defense bar and the public defender's office have a degree of separation that is unhealthy. This situation does not exist in the federal system where the public defender's office and the private bar are on very good terms and the public defender's office provides assistance when asked from simple advice to briefs. This needs to be fixed.
On the fourth floor of the Marshall County Courthouse there is a room where the attorneys congregate to cut their deals, determine which cases will go to trial. I did notice that the public defender had a stack of files about a foot and a half high which indicates to me that numerous defendants don't see much of their attorney. And, of course, the representative from the public defender's office was the attorney in the room with the least sense of humor, the least talkative, and generally unfriendly. This reinforces my opinion that the defense bar and the public defender's office have a degree of separation that is unhealthy. This situation does not exist in the federal system where the public defender's office and the private bar are on very good terms and the public defender's office provides assistance when asked from simple advice to briefs. This needs to be fixed.
25 March 2010
A lesson reinforced. When the prosecutor doesn't offer you anything, you let the judge decide. We had a probation violation hearing this afternoon--Thursday, 25 March 2010. The county attorney and the probation offer suggested, not without a certain smirk, that my client should just agree to do his time and have his probation revoked. This is not an offer that warrants acquiescence. Neither I nor my client thought it much of a deal so we had a hearing. The allegation was of 12 different violations nine of which were not answering the VICAP call. If I have the letters correctly, it stands for the machine that a probationer must put on his phone and answer when called and which also register breath alcohol. Judge Mott did not find any violations and released the defendant from custody. I really didn't think that we would prevail, but we did. I guess neither the county attorney, the probation officer, nor myself properly evaluated the case--at least in the mind of Judge Mott.
In the second hearing that I had scheduled in front of Magistrate Rickers, my client and two others were charged with trespass. Another brilliant charge filed by Officer Chris Wing. Three went into an apartment to retrieve a couch and other items that all agreed belonged to one of the three. The girl of the apartment told the two girls entering the apartment to leave. There were a few words, the girls picked up what they could carry and left the apartment. The boy who had come with them carried out the couch by himself. All three were charged with trespass presumably under the theory that the three did not leave the very instant the girl of the apartment told them to leave. Apparently discussion is not allowed. I and Joanie Greif had co-defendants and between us and the city attorney there were to be ten witnesses. The earlier hearings did not finish until almost four. Rather than continue the matter the city attorney dismissed the charges. He had earlier stated that he would dismiss the charges if the defendants paid the costs. I really do get tired of that practice. It happens continually. "Oh, we will dismiss the charges if your client pays the costs." Most defendants take the deal to not face the possibility of a conviction. I don't like it and do when I can refuse to do it.
In the second hearing that I had scheduled in front of Magistrate Rickers, my client and two others were charged with trespass. Another brilliant charge filed by Officer Chris Wing. Three went into an apartment to retrieve a couch and other items that all agreed belonged to one of the three. The girl of the apartment told the two girls entering the apartment to leave. There were a few words, the girls picked up what they could carry and left the apartment. The boy who had come with them carried out the couch by himself. All three were charged with trespass presumably under the theory that the three did not leave the very instant the girl of the apartment told them to leave. Apparently discussion is not allowed. I and Joanie Greif had co-defendants and between us and the city attorney there were to be ten witnesses. The earlier hearings did not finish until almost four. Rather than continue the matter the city attorney dismissed the charges. He had earlier stated that he would dismiss the charges if the defendants paid the costs. I really do get tired of that practice. It happens continually. "Oh, we will dismiss the charges if your client pays the costs." Most defendants take the deal to not face the possibility of a conviction. I don't like it and do when I can refuse to do it.
24 March 2010
Court Service with Judge Mott
Arrived late for Judge Mott's court this morning. Court services in Wednesday. Court services means people go to jail, placed on probation, get fined; or, simply plead to a criminal charge, set further hearings including trials. As I said I arrived late and there was standing room only when I did arrive. I was a 100% today--all clients present and accounted for. This is an unusual occurrence in that usually one or more has forgotten, never knew, or just doesn't want to come.
Some say that Judge Mott does not give deferred judgments or deferred sentences. That is incorrect--he does when the situation warrants it. My count this morning was three guilty pleas, two sentencings, and a bond review hearing. Afraid I may not have been successful on the bond review matter, but the Judge has not ruled. It is my opinion, my client should stay in jail until his current charges are resolved. He does not seem to have the ability to stay out of jail for he is continually incurring new charges. The only method open to him to resolve his legal problems may be simply to stay in jail pending trial on the current charges. Some just can't win--bad karma.
Some say that Judge Mott does not give deferred judgments or deferred sentences. That is incorrect--he does when the situation warrants it. My count this morning was three guilty pleas, two sentencings, and a bond review hearing. Afraid I may not have been successful on the bond review matter, but the Judge has not ruled. It is my opinion, my client should stay in jail until his current charges are resolved. He does not seem to have the ability to stay out of jail for he is continually incurring new charges. The only method open to him to resolve his legal problems may be simply to stay in jail pending trial on the current charges. Some just can't win--bad karma.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
